Justices use guidance from foreign courts

AP ^ | August 3, 2003 | GINA HOLLAND

[sarcasm]

WASHINGTON--The Supreme Court is looking beyond America's borders for guidance in handling cases on issues like the death penalty and gay rights, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said Saturday.

The justices referred to the findings of foreign courts this summer in their ruling that states may not punish gay couples for having sex.

And in 2002, the court said that executing mentally retarded people is unconstitutionally cruel. That ruling noted that the practice was opposed internationally.

''Our island or lone ranger mentality is beginning to change,'' Ginsburg told the American Constitution Society, a liberal lawyers group holding its first convention.

Justices ''are becoming more open to comparative and international law perspectives,'' said Ginsburg, who has supported a more global view of judicial decision-making. Ginsburg cited an international treaty in her vote in June to uphold the use of race in college admissions.

The shift has angered some conservatives. Justice Antonin Scalia, in the gay sex case, wrote with two colleagues that the court should not ''impose foreign moods, fads, or fashions on Americans.''

David Rivkin Jr., a conservative Washington attorney, said foreign trends can be helpful to legislators in setting policy but not to judges in interpreting the U.S. Constitution.

Ginsburg said Saturday that the Internet is making decisions of courts in other countries more readily available in America, and they should not be ignored

[sgtbono2002]

Where were the Filibusters when Ginsburg was appointed to the court. I suppose if the rest of the world jumped off a bridge she would to. We dont need Lemmings on the court.

[DPB101]

The Supreme Court is looking even beyond our constitution, Anglo-American jurisprudence and the law of foreign nations. This brief, accepted by the Supreme Court, cites only Exodus ,Leviticus,The Talmud, Menachem Elon and Maimonides.

[Bonaparte]

Art III, Sec 1 states that justices will hold their offices during good behavior. Subjecting Americans to the legislative edicts of foreign countries is not good behavior, it's betrayal. I've got to wonder why our Congress has no apparent objection to the court's re-assignment of their legislative power to European assemblies.

[Sacajaweau]

When this government was created, we looked beyond our shores, and in fact we looked all over the universe: "That they are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

And Roe vs Wade destroys a life!!

And does that mean that sometime in the future, abortion will be mandatory?

[Vesuvian]

I'm not sure what concerns me more- the fact that this dingbat is citing foreign cases as precedents in her decisions, or the fact that she's bragging about it. Kind of reminds me of the student who scours the internet in order to cut and paste a thesis, since they are too lazy or too dumb to do it themselves.

[jazzlite]

It would be my guess that Ms Ginsburg would vote for her ideas to be mandatory. Why would this Judge want to apply the legal decisions of other nations to this one? Does any nation in the world enjoy more freedom than America..more success, more prosperity for more people, more health, more power?? Do other nations have the problems with migration that we have? Does she want our nation to become socialistic or communistic like most of the rest of the world? I am so insulted that any Judge would seek guidance from another nation for making judgments in this one. We have all the information we need in our Constitution, Our Bill of Rights and our legal history. By the way, is Ms Ginsberg not the wealthiest member of the court?

[Tunehead54]

This sh!t has angered some conservatives. Justice Antonin Scalia, in the gay sex case, wrote with two colleagues that the court should not ''impose foreign moods, fads, or fashions on Americans.''

---

There. That line needed fixin'.

[IronJack]

''Our island or lone ranger mentality is beginning to change,''

Translation: "We're inching our way toward the same level of depravity Europe has enjoyed for decades."

[Noachian]

''Our island or lone ranger mentality is beginning to change,'' Ginsburg told the American Constitution Society, a liberal lawyers group holding its first convention.

This is the kind of arrogance that should be expected from someone with an elitist mentality who is appointed to a lifetime job with no accountability to the electorate. If American society is to change it is for the American people, working through their ELECTED representatives, to change it. It's not the constitutional mandate of the Judiciary to make unwanted changes in American society based on foreign law. Nor is it proper for a sitting Justice to demean her vows to protect and defend the American Constitution by interbreeding it with European style flavor-of-the-month constitutions.

Justices ''are becoming more open to comparative and international law perspectives,'' said Ginsburg, who has supported a more global view of judicial decision-making. Ginsburg cited an international treaty in her vote in June to uphold the use of race in college admissions.

This type of statement from an unelected High Court Justice can only be interpreted as meaning she favors gutting the American Constitution with globalist interpretations until America becomes a European style "enlightened" socialist state. This is certainly not the "good behavior" intended by the Founding Fathers.

If the Congress does not take the rulings of the Court under Legislative Review, and provide proper legislation to blunt the Courts excesses, then the Legislature will have left the American people open to de facto legislation by an unelected, and unaccountable, High Court. That is LEGISLATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION. That is tyranny.

Little can be expected from a Congress who has no wish to alienate any segment of society that may cast a vote. Thus, Congress has abnegated its constitutional authority to regulate the Judiciary and in the process has emasculated itself.

If Congress will not stop the unelected High Courts constitutional abuses who will? The American people can stop this Judicial slide into European Socialism by taking control of the Judiciary themselves. Subjecting the Court to direct elections will put the fate of the Justices directly into the hands of the American people.

The American people can shape their own society or they can let the unelected Judicial elite do it for them.

[nightdriver]

"Subjecting the Court to direct elections will put the fate of the Justices directly into the hands of the American people."

Then we will only get judges that are like Clinton.

[steplock]

ping

[sergeantdave]

“SOVIET: Council that was the primary unit of government in the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and that officially performed both legislative and executive functions at the all-union, republic, province, city, district, and village levels."

A soviet is the Russian word for “council” - unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats.

There’s a name for this kind of people control. It’s called collectivism. The Russians called it soviet socialism.

The supreme court is creating the United Soviet Socialists States of America.

[virgil]

I don't think we have an "island" mentality. Its just that we think the US should be a leader, not a follower. Justice ginsu seems to have lost faith in our justice system and can no longer function in good faith as US supreme court justice. She should retire.

[jwalsh07]

''Our island or lone ranger mentality is beginning to change,'' Ginsburg told the American Constitution Society, a liberal lawyers group holding its first convention.

Just a heads up on the evolution of Constitutional Law.

[Sabertooth]

Just a heads up on the evolution of Constitutional Law.

Hey, I'm not sure that's entirely fair to the biology textbooks. From the article...

The justices referred to the findings of foreign courts this summer in their ruling that states may not punish gay couples for having sex.

I think we're talking here about unnatural selection.

[sarcasm]

Welcome back!

[Sabertooth]

Thanks man, glad to be here.

[Torie]

John, individual justices need a larger set of precedents to pick and choose from. You want to constrict their pallet. How can they be great artists with truncated materials? How can they expand our minds, and our hearts, and lead us into the Elysian fields?

Moving right along out of the stratosphere, Ginsberg needs more precedents because she is as dumb as rocks, and too stupid to skillfully manipulate the existing ones. Maybe she should do some brown bag lunches with Justice Kennedy for the next decade or so, until she gets the hang of it.

OK, so my post is worthless. Sue me.

[jwalsh07]

OK, so my post is worthless. Sue me.

Sue you? Nah, I was thinking about impeaching Ginsberg. She's whacky.